The title of this piece does not reflect its contents. So far, according to the article, DuPont has been forced to pay less than $100 million in damages for a

The title of this piece does not reflect its contents. So far, according to the article, DuPont has been forced to pay less than $100 million in damages for a chemical that resulted in $1 billion plus annual profits. Personal injury suits are ongoing, but "At the rate of four trials a year, DuPont would continue to fight PFOA cases until the year 2890." The lawyer sounds incredibly and understandably frustrated with the situation: "The thought that DuPont could get away with this for this long," Bilott says, his tone landing halfway between wonder and rage, "that they could keep making a profit off it, then get the agreement of the governmental agencies to slowly phase it out, only to replace it with an alternative with unknown human effects — we told the agencies about this in 2001, and they’ve essentially done nothing." A better title would be: "Through effective legal strategy, DuPont delays outlays for pollution effects"